Working with the idea that value is current and future utility to people: Total utility depends on people's ability to use/appreciate goods and services. There

Working with the idea that value is current and future utility to people: Total utility depends on people's ability to use/appreciate goods and services. Therefore, a transaction that allows for more use/appreciation creates value. However, you can anticipate that other people will use/appreciate something, and set out to produce it. The expectation of future sale creates value for you; value is created before any buyer appears. Feels to me like most value is probably created intentionally this way. On real estate: I think there's not that much value created on average simply due to transacting. Sometimes people die and their estate is sold, or a space has features that are more valued by the buyer (e.g. proximity to water for a sailor, or 3-phase power for a machine shop), or some other asymmetry arises. However, most spaces don't suddenly provide more value to people just because someone else resides there. The majority of value in real estate is created by building/modifying, and the overall community (e.g. building a train stop increases value around it). Asymmetrically valued features are probably far from the biggest driver of value or price increase in aggregate. So, I agree value can be created by transacting real estate, but find the statement a bit misleading when thinking about why prices go up. The growth of availability of space is much slower than the growth of population and buying power.